The qualities that make employees stand out early in their careers aren’t necessarily the ones that make them most valuable later on.

According to Texas A&M University’s Mays Business School management researcher Dr. Matthew Call, star employees tend to create value in different ways as their careers progress. Early on, they create outsized value through their individual performance. Experienced stars, meanwhile, contribute by helping colleagues succeed, sharing expertise and developing future stars.

In research published in the Journal of Management, Call and his colleagues examined how the relationship between pay and value creation changes over the course of a star employee’s career.

“Most of us, especially those who have led other people, can agree there are certain employees who create outsized value,” said Call. “To have one of those on your team, they’re tremendous. Then you move on to, how do we best manage these folks as well as how do we manage their impact on the team?”

To better understand how star employees create value over time, Call and his colleagues examined the relationship between compensation and value creation across different career stages.

Early in their careers, Call said, top performers often generate outsized value before the job market fully recognizes their contributions. Because they haven’t yet built the visibility or bargaining power that comes with experience, they frequently create more value than they’re compensated for.

As those same employees gain experience, their visibility grows along with their ability to negotiate higher salaries. At the same time, their individual output begins to level off.

Looking only at individual contributions, these employees may appear to be overpaid.

Rather than producing more work themselves, Call said experienced stars create value by helping the people around them perform better — sharing institutional knowledge, mentoring colleagues and developing the next generation of top performers.

“What we found was that older stars have a more positive impact on their firms and their colleagues than younger stars do,” Call said.

He compares the shift to accomplished musicians whose later careers become defined not only by their own work, but by producing and mentoring other artists.

“If you can look at stars who are in the later parts of their career as people who can be a catalyst for future stars, I think this type of mentoring becomes really important,” Call said.

The findings suggest organizations may need to rethink how they support top performers.

High performers may be viewed as a threat to their peers by consistently outperforming them, Call said. Managers should help star employees recognize this dynamic so they can build trust with colleagues and prove that working with them is an opportunity rather than a threat.

“Helping them to recognize that you do much better when you have peer support becomes really important, especially as these star employees start to get more visibility and often get more responsibility,” Call said.

More responsibility often means delegating work and relying on others to help execute ideas, making peer support essential.

“When you want someone to become a star in the long term and maintain that type of productivity, you need to teach them how to play well with others,” Call said.

This article originally appeared on stories.tamu.edu.

Featured Researcher

Matthew Call

Associate Professor Department of Management

View Profile

The post How the Value of Star Employees Changes Over a Career appeared first on Mays Business School.

Americans are expected to spend a record amount on back-to-school shopping this year. A Texas A&M University retail expert says families are spreading purchases across months, juggling rising costs and making tough decisions about what they need now versus what can wait.

“We may see record back-to-school spending, but that doesn’t mean families feel comfortable with how much they are going to spend,” said Thomas McMillan, professor of practice in marketing and director of the Center for Retailing Innovation at Texas A&M University’s Mays Business School. “The basics are going to cost a little bit more, and that’s squeezing the total budget of a family.”

According to the National Retail Federation, the average K-12 family is expected to spend around $863.86 on back-to-school items, up from $858.07 in 2025. McMillan said higher prices driven by inflation, tariffs and a rise in oil prices mean many families are likely to prioritize essentials, wait for promotions and decide what items can be reused from previous years.

The shopping season itself has also changed.

“We’re seeing big sales like Amazon Prime Day start in June,” he said. “This season will also go later than usual because there’s a second wave of shopping that takes place after the school year starts, when people start getting specific requests for classroom supplies, oftentimes from teachers.”

The Hidden Costs After School Starts

For many families, buying school supplies is only the beginning.

McMillan describes the additional expenses that arrive after classes begin — including extracurricular activities, meal programs, fundraisers and other school fees — as a hidden “second bill” that can significantly affect household budgets

“The second hidden bill is the list of all the fees they’re going to have to pay once school starts,” he said. “Once the school year begins, and they start racking up costs with that hidden second bill, some parents may have no plans for it and just have to spend what they have, or they’re going ahead and planning for it now because they know it happens each and every year.”

Moving a child into college can also force many parents to make decisions on essentials alongside school supplies.

“If you think about moving a college student into a dorm or to an apartment, they are essentially starting a new residence, so families have to plan for all the essentials, including bedding, furniture, home products — everything you would need to start a household,” he said. “That’s why college shopping is a large part of that back-to-school shopping. The amount of money that families have to spend in order to move their student into a new place is substantial.”

The NRF projects per person spending on college shopping to reach $1,437.79 this year.

AI and Social Media Reshape Shopping Lists

Technology is also playing a larger role in how families shop.

McMillan said many consumers are using artificial intelligence to compare prices, research products and build shopping budgets, while AI-powered recommendations can also influence what ends up in their carts.

“Families can use AI to help them compare prices, learn more about different types of products and even help them budget for back-to-school shopping,” he said. “On the flip side, you have the AI making specific recommendations of products, and AI, having context of the individual and their specific requests, makes an impact on the types of items being bought. Depending on the AI, they could be sending specific links for products.”

Social media and influencers are having a similar effect. McMillan said parents are likely to shop from two lists: the official school list and the wish list shaped by friends, influencers and social media.

“You’ll see specific channels are major drivers of spending, like Instagram and TikTok. They’re very influential, especially for the younger generation going back to school,” he said. “There’s always a school list, but there’s also going to be a wish list. On the school list, you may see a backpack, but a student might want a specific name brand of backpack they want because they’ve seen their friends talk about it on social media, and that’s the wish list at work.”

This article originally appeared on stories.tamu.edu.

Featured Researcher

Thomas McMillan

Professor and Director of the Center for Retailing Innovation Arch H. Aplin III ’80 Department of Marketing

View Profile

The post Back-to-school shopping starts earlier, lasts longer and costs more than ever appeared first on Mays Business School.

Historically, companies looking to go public in the United States had two choices: the New York Stock Exchange or NASDAQ. The Texas Stock Exchange changes that. The first fully integrated national securities exchange to receive approval from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in decades, the Dallas-based exchange began live trading in July 2026, with exchange-traded product listings and corporate listings, and eventually IPOs to follow.

Helping build that exchange from the ground up are three graduates of Mays Business School and the Adam C. Sinn ’00 Department of Finance.

Peyton Migaud ’19 ’20 and Connor Watson ’21 ’22 both completed the Master of Science in Finance (MSF) program, complementing their bachelor’s degrees in applied mathematics and industrial and systems engineering, respectively. Financial Times recently ranked Mays’ MSF as the No. 2 public program of its kind in the country. The accelerated track allows students to begin earning their master’s in finance concurrently with their undergraduate degree, adding just one additional year to their degree plan. 

Christian Buman ’25 took part in Mays’ Professional Program in Accounting, in the James Benjamin Department of Accounting, earning his BBA in accounting and a master’s in financial management.

Migaud now serves as TXSE’s chief of staff and director of corporate strategy, Watson as vice president of trading strategy and execution, and Buman as a listings strategy and execution analyst. Together, they’ve had a front-row seat to the exchange’s journey from an idea sketched on a whiteboard to a fully operational marketplace poised to reshape U.S. capital markets.

The three Aggies reflect on TXSE’s launch, the lessons they carried from Mays, and what’s next for the exchange.

What has it been like to help bring the Texas Stock Exchange (TXSE) from concept to reality?

Peyton Migaud ’19 ’20: “It’s really been an incredible opportunity and a once-in-a-career experience. There aren’t very many people that get the chance to build a national securities exchange from the ground up, alongside world-class experts. It’s exciting to be a part of something that has the potential to reshape U.S. capital markets.”

Give us an overview of TXSE and its impact for someone who may not be aware.

PM: “TXSE is the first fully integrated exchange to receive SEC approval in decades. Historically, if a company wanted to go public in the U.S., they had one of two choices: the New York Stock Exchange and NASDAQ. We are now the third option.”

Can you describe your roles at TXSE?

Connor Watson ’25: “I’m currently the vice president of trading strategy and execution. I help our leadership solve strategic and operational problems and make decisions. Both big and small, long-term and near-term planning — I help TXSE make decisions. I sit at the intersection of finance, operations, accounting, and technology.”

PM: “I’m chief of staff and director of corporate strategy. I work closely with our CEO and leadership to turn priorities into action and keep important projects moving forward. I’ve been deeply involved in each of our financing rounds and lead engagement with our shareholders, board, and advisory council. My day-to-day, even hour-to-hour, often widely varies.”

Christian Buman ’25: “I’m a listings strategy and execution analyst. I do a lot of the material preparation and data work for corporate transfers as well as IPOs (Initial Public Offerings), so doing research on their trading metrics and comparable company trading metrics, and we just put together the materials we present to those companies.”

How did your experience at Mays Business School prepare you for this role?

CW: “I would not be here without Mays or the MSF program. The career path I ended up choosing, the relationships that I made there, and the opportunities that fell out — all can be credited to Mays. I would do it all over again if I had the option.”

PM: “I had professors at Mays who pushed me out of my comfort zone and challenged me to take on opportunities that I might not have pursued on my own. They helped me realize I was capable of a lot more than I had given myself credit for and helped instill a level of confidence in me that has helped me get to where I am.”

What has been the most rewarding part of seeing TXSE officially open?

PM: “Seeing everything we’ve been working on come to life. Connor and I met our CEO, James Lee, over three years ago when TXSE was an idea on a handful of pieces of paper. We’ve helped translated the idea into big drawings on a whiteboard to now a fully operational exchange. It’s incredibly rewarding to have worked with TXSE from inception all the way through operational launch.”

CB: “It has made the materials we’re preparing and presenting to prospective listed companies more meaningful. We’re no longer pitching the idea of a stock exchange or something that hadn’t proven itself. Now we’re pitching something that we continue to prove is working.” 

What has been the most impactful lesson you’ve learned throughout this whole experience?

CB: “Being flexible. I’m on the listings team, but I often work on things that wouldn’t really fall under my job title — a lot of times I’m asked to do things I’ve never done before. It’s about figuring it out and helping where you’re needed.”

What advice would you give Mays students who want to work in finance or capital markets?

CW: “Stay patient, earn the trust of the folks around you, and stay the course. When you’re first starting your career, particularly in finance or capital markets, it can be intense and the entry level roles are notoriously difficult. It can sometimes feel like that is how it’s going to be forever. But you’ll look up in two or three years and be in a great position.” 

What’s next for TXSE, and what are you most excited about moving forward?

PM: “We recently launched trading — that was our first major milestone. In the next few months, we’ll be launching both exchange traded products and corporate listings. We’ve been having conversations with prospective issuers for, honestly, years now, so it’s going to be exciting for everyone to see what we’ve been working on and the impact that this will make on capital markets.”

The post Three Mays Grads Help Launch Texas Stock Exchange appeared first on Mays Business School.

Alessia Catullo ’25 ’26 found an early interest in trading.

“When I was six, I used to sit on the couch and watch Jim Cramer’s Mad Money with my dad,” she says. “I was fascinated by the markets and eventually asked him if he would help me open and equity portfolio.”

That passion led her to pursue a finance degree at Mays and apply for the competitive Trading, Risk, and Investments Program (TRIP). TRIP not only challenged her but highlighted different career options in the energy industry, which accounts for 17% of GDP. “I didn’t truly learn about the commodity markets until I discovered TRIP, and once I did, I was immediately hooked,” Catullo says. “The physical nature of commodities, the complexity of the markets, and how energy directly impacts the world around us really stood out to me.”

TRIP’s commitment to providing an innovative educational experience piques both student and industry interest. Dr. Detlef Hallermann ’89 was recruited from a successful energy trading career in 2003 to join Mays as a clinical professor, and he developed TRIP’s concept with feedback from his extensive network. The TRIP program offers a master’s degree in finance management or a TRIP certificate, both of which provide leading-edge knowledge and skills as well as a strong professional network to help Aggies succeed in this fast-paced industry. 

Students complete courses in trade floor dynamics, energy project development, technical analysis of financial markets, and trading risk management. They also gain an insider view of the industry through three paid internships and required courses taught by industry representatives. 

Understanding the inherent challenges of working in the high-stakes energy industry, TRIP faculty also strive to incorporate the Aggie Core Values and lessons in ethics throughout the master’s and certificate programs. “While equity trading has a large number of traders, energy trading has a much smaller network of counterparties, so this industry is much more relational,” says Hallermann. “Energy traders have to back financial positions; as a result, they must understand the dynamics of the physical market and who is in a position to help them satisfy a need for a specific product. Successful energy traders build a strong network of counterparties who can fulfill that need, so there is less focus on the cut-throat atmosphere that is often used to describe the equity trading world. The energy trading industry emphasizes that your word is your commitment, and a verbal trade is a trade, even if you lose money.”

The post Trading Energy: Inside Mays’ Trading, Risk, & Investments Program appeared first on Mays Business School.

Once upon a time, in Anywhere, USA, there’s a place called “Fable Hospital” where patients heal faster, staff stay longer and the building is designed to work with — not against — the people inside it.

It’s not a real place, but it was designed to solve a very real problem: why hospitals can be expensive to run, hard on staff and not always built for the best patient care.

In a new study published in BMJ Leader, researchers including Texas A&M University Distinguished Professor Dr. Leonard Berry, imagine this fictional hospital from the ground up to show that better design doesn’t just improve care, it can pay for itself.

High-Performing Hospitals Are Not Too Expensive To Build

The study models a 300-bed community hospital and asks a simple question: what happens when architects and designers rethink everything, including airflow, daylight, building materials and energy systems? The goal was to demonstrate the business case for investing more up-front to build a hospital the right way.

By investing an additional $25 million to $30 million (about 3% of total construction costs), a hospital could recover that cost within the first two years of operation, the study finds. After that, the savings continue to grow.

“This research shows that designing a better hospital is not a luxury, it’s a smart investment,” said Berry, an expert in healthcare services in the Arch H. Aplin III ’80 Department of Marketing. “When you build with evidence in mind, you improve care, support staff and reduce costs all at the same time.”

Lower Costs and Shorter Stays

The model draws on existing research linking hospital environments — such as access to nature, improved air quality and reduced noise — to better patient outcomes and staff performance, then applies those effects using conservative assumptions.

“Design features that improve air quality, reduce noise and provide access to nature are associated with shorter hospital stays,” Berry said. “Even a modest reduction in length of stay produces millions in annual savings, making it one of the largest impacts of the model.”

Across the hospital, those design changes add up quickly; they include:

• Shorter patient stays: about $7.25 million in annual savings
• Fewer medical errors: roughly $1 million saved each year
• Stronger staff retention: more than $1.2 million annually
• Lower energy and water use: about $350,000 combined per year
• Fewer renovations and lower material costs: millions saved in initial and long-term building expenses

Taken together, the model suggests more than $100 million in net financial gains is possible over the first decade of operations.

In the story of Fable Hospital, the moral is simple: a better hospital isn’t just possible, it’s practical and it pays off.

Hospitals and Regenerative Design

The study reflects a broader shift in how hospitals are designed, from minimizing harm to actively supporting health.

The researchers describe this approach as “regenerative design.”

“Regenerative design looks at how a hospital can contribute positively not only to those using the building but to the broader community as well,” Berry said. “That includes reducing energy demand, improving air and water systems and creating spaces that support healing for patients and better working conditions for staff.”

In practical terms, that might mean accessible gardens, patient rooms with views of nature, and cleaner materials and designs that help buildings withstand extreme weather. “The idea is to think of a hospital not as a standalone structure, but as part of a larger system that influences patient outcomes, workforce well-being and community health,” Berry said.

The work brings together a wide range of design strategies — many already used in other settings — and evaluates their combined impact in one place.

“These are not abstract ideas,” Berry said. “They’re practical strategies that can be implemented today. The real opportunity is putting them together in a way that delivers meaningful results.”

A 20-Year Commitment to Better Hospitals

The current study of Fable Hospital 3.0 builds on more than 20 years of research. Concepts outlined in two previous Fable Hospital articles (2004, 2012) have already shown benefits when applied and have clearly contributed to the evidence-based design movement in healthcare.

“Fable Hospital is fictional, but it is based on the use of design initiatives that are evidenced-based, i.e., proven in practice,” Berry said. “Many newer hospitals have incorporated some of these design elements and are benefiting from doing so.”

In addition to Berry, the original author team included Texas A&M Professor Emeritus of Architecture Dr. Kirk Hamilton and Blair Sadler, retired CEO of Rady Children’s Hospital in San Diego. Fable 3.0 was done in partnership with the architecture firm of Perkins&Will.  

The Moral of the Story

The hospital in the study may be fictional, but the challenges it addresses are not. Hospitals are long-term investments, and once built, they shape care for decades.

That’s why the researchers argue that getting the design right the first time matters, not just for patients and staff, but for the bottom line.

“In the story of Fable Hospital, the moral is simple,” Berry said, “a better hospital isn’t just possible, it’s practical and it pays off.”

This article originally appeared on stories.tamu.edu.

The post A Hospital That Pays for Itself? Sounds Like a Fairy Tale appeared first on Mays Business School.

There’s a well-known saying often described — inaccurately — as an ancient Chinese curse: “May you live in interesting times.” Regardless of the phrase’s provenance, it expresses a sentiment that resonates strongly today. The first few months of 2026 have been a reminder to business leaders about how quickly everything from economic conditions to geopolitical alliances and technological capabilities can change. 

It can be tempting to think of this extraordinarily eventful start to the year as an aberration, an odd blip of activity between long periods of normalcy. But the truth is that continuous and accelerating transformation is more the norm than anomaly today. The most obvious example is how companies and employees are navigating enormous and fast-moving technological change driven by artificial intelligence (AI), which has the potential to fundamentally reshape the nature of work, the prospects of corporations and startups, and the prosperity of entire economies and societies. 

Why Leadership Matters More Than Ever

There is one foundational ingredient companies, governments, and other organizations need to navigate this rapid, constant, and often wrenching change: strong leadership. “Leadership is everything,” says Stephen Courtright, director of the Flippen Leadership Institute and professor of management at Mays Business School, who has spent his career researching leadership dynamics and organizational behavior.

Courtright says AI is an ideal example underscoring the critical role of leadership. While it’s clear AI will be enormously disruptive, whether that disruption will be beneficial will be largely determined by leaders. “It’s not just that AI can’t replace leaders, but it necessitates leaders who can guide and influence the use of AI as both a corporate good and a societal good,” says Courtright.   

While the observation that strong leadership is vital during a time of rapid change and uncertainty may seem obvious, it raises a series of deeper questions. What exactly constitutes strong leadership? What qualities and behavior do good leaders embrace to help their organizations and employees navigate turbulent times? Of course, there is no lack of opinions about what leaders need to think, say, and do.

“The world is oversaturated with leadership content. And leadership is one of those topics where anybody anywhere can suddenly call themselves an expert,” says Courtright. Some of the guidance can be helpful to leaders grappling with acute change and uncertainty while other so-called thought leadership can be downright counterproductive. What matters for leaders seeking support and direction is to be aware of the work that goes into producing it. 

Though well-intentioned, a significant proportion of leadership advice is based on the unique experiences of individuals. There are obvious limits to those insights, formed as they are by time spent in specific companies and industries with cultures, pressures, challenges, and opportunities very different from those faced by other leaders. Those proffering leadership advice based on their own experience are also limited by their own biases, personal agendas, and faulty or incomplete memories. 

Scientifically rigorous leadership research is something entirely different. “We’re not looking at one person; we’re looking at tens of thousands of people. We’re looking at very large samples,” says Courtright. “By looking at large samples and taking an empirical approach, we have a much better grasp of what truth is when it comes to leadership. In the end, that’s what people are looking for. What’s the truth around leadership?”

Here’s the good news: Mays Business School professors produce a large volume of high-quality research that can help leaders identify blind spots that may be harming their organizations, get the most out of their talented workers, and confidently make decisions at a time when genuine confidence about how to lead is understandably in short supply.

The Star Employee Paradox

Matthew Call, an associate professor in Mays’ Department of Management, has devoted much of his recent research to the best ways to manage “star” employees, the handful of workers whose innovation and productivity deliver outsized value to their organizations. Call has specifically examined whether the big bonuses and hefty salaries companies use to lure stars is worth it.

The short answer is yes, but it’s a far more nuanced matter, especially for leaders. When stars first emerge, they are incredibly productive. Early in their careers, they generate breakthrough ideas at a rate far above their peers. Their individual output is both high and influential. But over time, that personal productivity advantage begins to taper off. In fact, compared to non-stars, stars’ individual output declines more sharply as their careers progress. 

The Goal Should Be to Let Young Stars Shine

This doesn’t mean stars “burn out” or lose their talent. Instead, what changes is how they create value. Early on, stars focus heavily on producing their own standout work. Later in their careers, they increasingly shift toward elevating others — mentoring collaborators, shaping how work gets done, and transferring the deeper know-how that allows teams to innovate on their own. In other words, stars move from being the primary engine of innovation to becoming force multipliers.

So the story isn’t that stars fade. It’s that they evolve. Their peak individual productivity tends to come early — but their broader impact on others can grow even as their own output slows.

The leadership implications of these findings are wide-ranging. During the early years of a star’s career, for example, leaders should do all they can to remove the busy work and distractions that could prevent them from fully maximizing their individual production. The goal should be to let young stars shine. As stars age and become less individually productive, leaders should proactively connect them to younger workers to turbocharge their performance and identify other formal ways to benefit from their experience and insights, such as appointing them to advisory councils and documenting their knowledge to develop company best practices. 

AI Meets Star Power

More recently, Call has investigated what the emergence of AI in the workplace means for stars, non-stars, and leaders. The short answer: AI is likely to widen the performance gulf between stars and non-stars and raise numerous nettlesome issues for leaders to navigate. “I think AI is a force multiplier for stars,” says Call. 

The reason is that star employees generally have the knowledge and expertise to extract the most value out of AI. They can recognize when AI is making mistakes and hallucinating and can prompt it in more effective ways than non-stars. Stars are also more likely to be credited more for their good work produced using AI than other workers. “We are living in a world where everyone is using AI, but no one really says when they are using it,” says Call. “I think there is going to be an attribution bias where a star producing good work enhanced by AI is going to get credit because they’re already smart while the work of non-stars will be dismissed because it was produced using AI.”

Preferencing stars who use AI is just one of the challenges facing leaders. Call gives the example of a principal at a consulting company. In the past, the principal would have relied on early career staff to do research, interviews, and pull together slides for client presentations. Today, AI can do much of that work quicker and cheaper than people can. “Is that sustainable? If you are going to scale the use of AI and don’t hire those entry-level positions, what happens to your talent pipeline?” says Call. “More generally, I just don’t think leaders have figured out how to govern AI and what transparent and responsible AI usage looks like.”

When Good Intentions Go Awry

AI raises plenty of other challenges leaders have never had to consider before. But even as leaders seek to find responsible ways to use the new technology to support employees, it’s also important to remain mindful of age-old, very human blind spots that can distort their decisions.    

Courtright has devoted time to researching counterproductive attitudes and perceptions in the belief that identifying them can help leaders be more effective. He has spoken to and worked with countless numbers of leaders and concluded that their intentions are almost universally good. The problem for leaders, employees, and organizations arise when leaders can’t translate those good intentions into productive behaviors and decisions. 

For example, he collaborated with several academics on a research paper whose title succinctly summarizes the question they sought to answer: “Why do bootlickers get empowered more than boat-rockers?” It’s a question that has been especially troubling to employees with disruptive but beneficial ideas who find themselves sidelined in favor of colleagues who support status quo company strategies and tactics by default. The topic is particularly important today because organizations need employees and leaders who are empowered to think differently and adapt quickly to a complex and continuously changing business environment. 

Empowering those who only agree with existing products, services, and strategies is problematic, and leaders grasp the need for innovation. So why do they shut down employees who raise novel ideas and actively deny them resources and support they would need to successfully develop something new? It’s not because leaders want to be bad bosses, says Courtright. “The good intention there is that I value loyalty and so therefore anybody who challenges the status quo I view as a threat because I value loyalty over everything else,” he explains. “As a result, I’m going to disempower that person when in reality it’s in my best interest to empower the boat-rocker because that is who gets stuff done and is innovative.” 

Recognizing the value that disruptors can deliver is a way leaders can benefit their employees and themselves. So, too, is recognizing other biases that prompt executives and managers to elevate people into important leadership positions. While most people in positions of authority assume these choices are guided by employee performance, Courtright’s research concludes that physical appearance often trumps merit. Published in 2025, the study “The beauty bias and leader emergence” demonstrates how physical appearance has a strong and measurable impact on who gets promoted within organizations. 

Again, the bias is not intentional. “But in the face of limited information, I’m going to look for things that somehow tell me, at least in my mind, that this person is caring and this person is competent, and so therefore they’re going to be a good leader,” says Courtright. “In reality, good looks have nothing to do with being caring, competent, or a good leader at all and not recognizing that results in me making poor selection decisions.”

Leaders’ Self-Reflection 

Identifying and selecting the right leaders to manage in the current environment of change and disruption has never been more important. Shilaan Alzahawi, an assistant professor of management at Mays, has focused a critical eye on the typical leader selection process. Frequently, leaders are self-selected, meaning that organizations simply wait for people who view themselves as leadership material to step forward, figuring that those with potential will apply for positions. 

Alzahawi’s research, “A legend in one’s own mind: The link between ambition and leadership evaluations,” demonstrates the deficiencies in this passive approach. Alzahawi and her fellow researchers examined 472 executives and found that ambitious individuals consistently overestimate their own leadership effectiveness, even when colleagues, subordinates, and managers disagree with those self-assessments. In fact, while ambitious employees gave themselves high marks across 10 leadership competencies, third-party evaluations found no correlation between ambition and leadership effectiveness. 

Recently published research by Joel Koopman, a management professor at Mays, examines the leadership benefits of a behavior often lacking in ambitious employees: self-reflection. Koopman and co-researchers studied a group of professional employees and found that the daily practice of reflecting on their “best possible leader self” increased positive leadership behaviors, like helping colleagues and communicating vision, throughout the rest of their day. 

Daily reflection about the type of leader people want to be helps reinforce the types of behaviors good leaders display. Importantly, Koopman and his fellow researchers also found that self-reflection helped both aspiring leaders and current leaders.

Effective leadership is also about knowing what behaviors to avoid. Mays’ Department of Management professor Huiwen Lian examined what motivates abusive leaders. The study, “Leaders’ impulsive versus strategic abuse, goal realization, and subsequent supportive behaviors: A self-regulation perspective,” found that leaders are abusive to their employees and colleagues for two reasons: hostility-
driven impulsive reactions and as a strategy to achieve goals. 

The distinction is important because it sheds light on how they can improve their behavior towards others and effectiveness as leaders. Leaders whose abusive behavior is driven by an inability to control their actions can benefit from training designed to strengthen their self-regulation and control. For leaders who are abusive to achieve their goals, training that raises their awareness of the real damage their behavior causes can help develop more effective and less corrosive ways to achieve the same goals. 

The research also punctures a common belief among leaders who use abuse to achieve their goals — that they can maintain good relationships with employees by being supportive after getting what they want. Lian and her colleagues found that alternating between abusive and supportive behavior produces some of the worst outcomes for employees and organizations, including low job commitment and higher rates of counterproductive behavior. 

Daily Self-Reflection Increased Positive Leadership Behaviors

The main takeaway from Lian’s research: organizations and leaders should strive to eliminate abusive leadership behavior, no matter its cause. 

In all his work with leaders, Courtright says virtually every aspiring or current leader wants to be effective and do the right thing. The reality of human beings is that this is always messy and complex — especially in a confusing and fast-moving business environment. But research about leadership dos and don’ts can provide helpful guidance and balance to weather this time of uncertainty. 

“The biggest implication of my research is for all of us, me included, to look in the mirror a little bit closer and say, How are my good intentions going awry? What are the biases that make it so I’m not optimizing my leadership?” says Courtright. “And how can I use that research to work on myself to become a better leader?” 

Featured Researchers

Stephen Courtright

Professor Department of Management

View Profile

Matthew Call

Associate Professor Department of Management

View Profile

Shilaan Alzahawi

Assistant Professor Department of Management

View Profile

Joel Koopman

Professor Department of Management

View Profile

Huiwen Lian

Professor Department of Management

View Profile

The post Breaking Through: Leadership Research Offers a Roadmap for Change appeared first on Mays Business School.

As artificial intelligence becomes more deeply embedded in everyday life and work, organizations are investing heavily in tools and employee training. But new research from Texas A&M University suggests a one-size-fits-all approach may miss a fundamental truth: people don’t all respond to AI the same way.

In a paper published in the journal Customer Needs and Solutions, Dr. Shrihari Sridhar, senior associate dean at Texas A&M University’s Mays Business School, the Joe Foster ’56 Chair in Business Leadership, and professor in the Arch H. Aplin III ’80 Department of Marketing, and his co-author, associate professor of marketing Dr. Huachao Gao, say that AI adoption has often been treated as if people share a single attitude toward the technology.

Their findings suggest the opposite: people experience AI in markedly different ways depending on their individual perspectives and the context in which they’re using it — a concept they call “AI-heterogeneity.”

“What we’re seeing is that leaders are almost mandating that employees need to be AI-ready,” Sridhar said. “One reason is they’re encouraging employees to become familiar with AI. Another could be market pressure. A third possibility is they don’t yet know exactly how to use AI to transform their business, but they believe getting employees to use more of it will help drive that change.”

But employers who are mandating AI usage may be creating compliance rather than adoption, Sridhar said. This perspective is informed by research drawing on a nationally representative survey of 2,144 U.S. adults that found people don’t all think about or engage with AI in the same way.

Rather than falling neatly into pro- or anti-AI camps, many survey respondents expressed mixed feelings about the technology, seeing it as both beneficial and threatening. Those attitudes often shifted depending on the task at hand. Someone might enthusiastically use AI for one task while distrusting it for another, suggesting adoption isn’t a simple yes-or-no decision.

The survey also identified what the researchers call the skepticism-usage paradox: some of the people most concerned about AI are among its most frequent users.

“The most anxious people are often the ones using more AI,” Sridhar said. “They’re using it and they’re anxious about it at the same time.”

He believes this can be attributed to several factors.

Some employees may feel pressured to show they’re using and embracing AI because their leaders expect it. Others may become more uneasy the more they use the tool and recognize just how capable it is.

“The more they use AI, the more they realize how good it is, and they see that eventually AI may outrun them,” Sridhar said. “They think, ‘I can’t believe this task used to take me eight hours and now it’s done in 20 minutes. What does this mean for me? Am I going to be replaced?’”

The findings led the researchers to reframe AI adoption as a segmentation challenge rather than simply a technology challenge. Instead of asking how to get more people to use AI, Sridhar said organizations should ask how different groups experience AI and tailor their approaches accordingly.

For employers, he says that means looking beyond adoption metrics. This requires taking it a step further and asking employees not only whether they’re using AI, but how they’re using it and how it makes them feel.

“There are some segments who adopt it immediately and some who don’t, and you have to understand which segment of your employees reacts in what way,” Sridhar said. “Understanding what drives them is really key, instead of mandating and scaring them.”

And instead of broad mandates, Sridhar recommends focusing on practical AI applications that help employees solve real problems.

“Start from the workflow. Start from the job to be done,” he said. “Seeing how the job was done earlier, how you can do it better and where you can bring in AI is a more productive, calming conversation.”

This article originally appeared on stories.tamu.edu.

Featured Researchers

Shrihari (Hari) Sridhar

Senior Associate Dean and Professor Arch H. Aplin III ’80 Department of Marketing

View Profile

Huachao Gao

Associate Professor Arch H. Aplin III ’80 Department of Marketing

View Profile

The post Why Employee AI Adoption Isn’t One-Size-Fits-All appeared first on Mays Business School.

Mays Business School at Texas A&M University has announced the semifinalist ventures advancing in the inaugural AI Venture Velocity Challenge, a national learning laboratory examining how artificial intelligence is reshaping entrepreneurship for students, educators, and employers.

The 27 semifinalist ventures challenge assumptions about student entrepreneurship, AI adoption, and what meaningful progress looks like for early-stage founders.

The AI Venture Velocity Challenge rewards progress over polish and measures learning velocity, not pitch quality. From May 1 through June 20, teams were asked to move from idea to evidence by testing critical assumptions, learning from customers and markets, using AI to accelerate discovery, and documenting how their ventures changed. Of 531 applicant teams, 248 submitted structured experimentation logs. The semifinalists, extended from 24 to 27 because of a scoring tie, were evaluated by a panel of industry judges using the published rubric and a consensus process that weighted multiple independent scores and written feedback. AI tools supported the analysis of submissions and judge data but did not replace human judgement in determining which teams advanced. Selection criteria included problem significance and opportunity quality, learning velocity and experimentation rigor, AI integration and leverage, evidence of venture progress, responsible impact and ethical design, and adaptive execution and coachability.

The advancing ventures represent 19 institutions, from Texas A&M, Purdue, Cornell, and UC Berkeley to High Point University, Pittsburg State University, and Florida International University. Founders range from freshmen to doctoral students across engineering, business, chemistry, medicine, agriculture, and computer science, and several of their ventures already have paying customers or signed letters of intent.

The strongest teams used AI to compress learning cycles, test assumptions faster, and make more disciplined decisions about customers, markets, products, and strategy. The ventures are tackling problems in a variety of industries. AI is being applied to match cancer patients to clinical trials, build wildfire intelligence for emergency responders, prevent livestock mortality on farms, preserve the voices of patients who are losing the ability to speak, and replace broken hiring processes with proof-of-work assessments. The teams that advanced most strongly were not those with the most polished technology, but those that reported negative findings, changed direction based on evidence, and recognized where AI still required human judgement.

“The pace of entrepreneurship has fundamentally changed,” said Levi Belnap, executive director of the Center for Applied Entrepreneurship and Innovation at Mays Business School. “AI has dramatically lowered the barriers to building new ventures. The real differentiator is no longer who can build the fastest, but who can learn the fastest. We built this challenge to measure that.”

The challenge also serves as a national research initiative, with findings shared through an interactive public dashboard at mays.tamu.edu/aivvc. The dashboard maps all 531 applications from 160 institutions and will include aggregate insights from teams’ experimentation logs as the challenge progresses.

Twelve finalists will be selected from the semifinalist pool to compete for $175,000 in non-dilutive funding at the AI Venture Velocity Challenge finals on Sept. 26 at Mays Business School in College Station, where the top prize will be $100,000. The finals are open to the public and community members are invited to attend, with event details and RSVP available on the Mays Business School website.

The semifinalist ventures are:

• AeroGraphiX, University of Connecticut | College of Liberal Arts and Sciences
• Atra, Pittsburg State University | Crossland College of Technology
• BusFactor, Purdue University | College of Engineering; Lehigh University | P. C. Rossin College of Engineering and Applied Science & College of Business and Economics
• ChelysSecurity, Florida International University | College of Engineering & Computing
• Concept Bytes, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill | School of Education
• Dhi, Rice University | College of Engineering
• Do Si, The University of Tulsa | College of Engineering & Computer Science; Tulane University | School of Science & Engineering
• EntroPINN, University of California, Berkeley | College of Chemistry; College of Computing, Data Science, and Society
• HumaniCore AI, The Pennsylvania State University | Smeal College of Business
• InfoSavvy, Southern Methodist University | Lyle School of Engineering
• Interlinked, University of California, Berkeley | College of Letters and Science
• IntuSense, Texas A&M University | College of Engineering
• Lobe AI, Texas A&M University | College of Engineering
• MottoNote, University of Wisconsin – Madison | College of Computing and Artificial Intelligence
• NEXUS, Baylor College of Medicine; Columbia University
• Oncera Health, University of Texas at Austin | College of Natural Sciences
• OsageMD, Texas A&M University | Mays Business School
• Parkevo, High Point University | Earl N. Phillips School of Business
• RaizenAI, George Mason University | College of Engineering and Computing
• Rally Dynamics, Texas A&M University | College of Engineering
• RELAI, Cornell University | SC Johnson College of Business; Weill Cornell Medicine | Graduate School of Medical Sciences
• Reliat, Texas A&M University | College of Engineering
• SecRecon, Virginia Tech | Pamplin Business School
• SmartSwine, Texas A&M University | College of Agriculture & Life Sciences
• Vitalia AI, Virginia Tech | Pamplin Business School
• VoiceVault, Texas A&M University | College of Engineering
• Zero1 IO, University of Silicon Valley

About Mays Business School

Texas A&M University’s Mays Business School is building a better future through business. By providing leadership-centered, experiential education to more than 8,000 undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral students in accounting, finance, management, management information systems, marketing, and supply chain management, Mays consistently ranks among the top public business schools nationally for its programs and faculty research. Our mission is developing leaders of character who make a positive difference in the communities where they live, work, and serve.

The post Mays Business School Announces Semifinalists Advancing in National AI Venture Velocity Challenge appeared first on Mays Business School.

Like any good researcher, Rajiv Mukherjee approached looking for love with an analytical mind. He’d explored dating apps — unsuccessfully — and eventually met his now-wife through a chance meeting in New York. Thinking about others still trying to find their match on online platforms, he became fascinated with the “search problem.” “I decided to understand why these platforms make certain design choices. I was interested from an academic perspective,” he says.

An assistant professor in Mays Business School’s Department of Information and Operations Management, Mukherjee realized while online platforms like Tinder and eHarmony offer access to a larger pool of prospective matches, they also pose major risks of catfishing or user disappointment after matches turn out different than their online profiles. “These online platforms give you access to more potential matches, but over time, another big problem crept in, and that is authentication,” Mukherjee says. His study looks into how these platforms decide to invest in authentication technology — the process of verifying user identities and credentials to ensure users are who they claim to be — and counseling services, which utilize sophisticated algorithms and questionnaires to assess compatibility and guide users toward better matches to improve the user experience.

Key findings from Mukherjee’s research, conducted along with co-researchers Amit Basu and Sreekumar Bhaskaran from SMU’s Cox School of Business, indicate the success of counseling and authentication services is dependent on the quality of the user base. Platforms with a broad set of users benefit greatly from strong authentication methods that generate a sense of security and confidence. Those with advanced counseling capabilities, on the other hand, may favor compatibility over authenticity. “If the counseling service is not very good, there’s no point in offering it,” Mukherjee affirms. “Bad advice is worse than no advice at all.”

Love and Business

The impacts of Mukherjee’s study go beyond dating. These insights can assist businesses in implementing successful processes for matching of their own, such as how they match suppliers and manufacturers. The dynamics of bilateral matching marketplaces, in which both sides desire an equally beneficial relationship, mimic the challenges of online dating. Companies have similar difficulties in establishing compatibility and credibility in their partnerships.

Despite technological developments, Mukherjee points out the quandary for these platforms is that their success leads to an adverse outcome: losing customers. “In order for platforms to make money, there is a perverse incentive where people should need to resubscribe,” he says. This profit-driven model may lead to a disregard for user satisfaction, jeopardizing the platform’s long-term viability. However, platforms such as Bumble have effectively differentiated themselves by ensuring user safety first and fostering a more inclusive environment, particularly for women.

Building User Trust and Commitment

The study stresses the significance of finding a balance between user safety, compatibility, and search efficiency. As the digital landscape evolves, Mukherjee’s observations serve as a timely reminder for dating platforms and businesses to concentrate on user experience. By investing in authentication and counseling services, these platforms can build user trust and contentment, assuring their continued relevance in a highly competitive industry.

For those navigating the realm of online dating or business connections, Mukherjee urges careful platform selections based on their particular goals and preferences. “Choose the platform correctly and have your expectations set right,” he says. “Understanding the unique attributes of each platform can greatly improve the chances of finding a good match.”

And, he adds, “Take your experiences in the dating world to the business world later because the matching continues on.”

Featured Researcher

Rajiv Mukherjee

Assistant Professor Department of Information and Operations Management

View Profile

The post Match Makers: Research Explores the Elements of Successful Dating Apps appeared first on Mays Business School.

When it comes to the future of artificial intelligence and business education at Mays, Sean Kelly ’05 is more than optimistic. As the CEO and co-founder of Amperon, a Houston-based AI-powered energy forecasting company, Sean is at the forefront of applying advanced AI and machine learning to energy forecasting and grid management. His work sits at the intersection of AI, energy data analytics, and entrepreneurship, and it’s a story that began at Mays Business School.

Sean first discovered his passion for finance and data as an undergrad at Mays, where he took Detlef Hallermann’s class in 2004 in what is now the Phillips 66 Trading Room. That experience sparked his interest in energy markets and quantitative problem-solving — foundational skills that would inform his early career as an energy trader and later as an entrepreneur when he co-founded Amperon.

Founded in 2018, Amperon was created to transform how energy market participants forecast, plan, and operate within a rapidly evolving grid environment. Sean has since then been at the forefront of the energy and technology industry, combining deep market expertise with entrepreneurial drive to modernize energy forecasting. Today, Amperon is a trusted partner to power and utility companies, delivering demand, renewable generation, and price forecasts. Through cutting-edge predictive analytics, seamless data integrations, and premium customer support, Amperon is helping customers enhance grid reliability and optimize asset performance.

These days, Sean is bringing his real-world experience back to Mays. Collaborating with faculty in Mays’ new AI in Business courses, he recently spoke on a panel alongside Assistant Dean for Artificial Intelligence Arnold Castro, providing perspective on the ethical and practical challenges of integrating AI into decision-making.

Sean credits the Aggie Network for inspiring him to give back with his time and talent. “I’ve gotten to see generosity that’s unbelievable,” Sean says. “That’s a big thing at Mays. And it’s never too early to start giving back.”

The power of the Aggie Network has been a common thread in Sean’s career journey. He landed his first job post-grad through a connection he made at Mays, who introduced him to the world of energy trading. He later moved to New York City to run his first company while also serving as the president of the New York A&M Club, where he led events, mentored new graduates, and taught finance classes. More importantly, Sean helped shape the club’s culture and deepened its ties to the Aggie community. “Aggies help Aggies. It’s real,” he says. “I can think of very few times that I’ve reached out to an Aggie CEO who hasn’t reached back out.”

Today, Sean is not only building on the legacy shaped at Mays, but also is helping to shape the future of business by modeling the same values he hopes to inspire in others. He serves on the board of the TRIP program, partnering with Mays to help prepare students for an AI-powered world, and hires TRIP interns each year. Sean’s experiences serve as a testament to how strong networks and enduring values can empower the next generation of business leaders.

“I’ve learned a lot in classrooms,” he says. “But I’ve learned even more from people who’ve been there before — and I want to be that person for the next generation.”

Get Involved

Interested in learning more about integrating AI and business? Discover our Flex Online Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Business Program.

The post The Energy of the Aggie Network appeared first on Mays Business School.